Why is Hotsauce's HotUtils not against ToS?

"CoSrenegade;c-2121609" wrote:
account sharing with a bot? What is this, Star Trek? Are we discussing if droids are species now and should have human rights?
Yes, I think the Doctor (EMH) is, but I'm afraid HotBot is far from it (aprox. 400 years)

It's account sharing because this bot in particular has to actually authenticate with your account to do what it does. All other publicly available bots that I know of just pull data without actually logging in to any accounts.

So, yes, HotBot is against ToS, but it's not really feasible to track down and ban all of its users, or to ban all of MAW, who openly account share, most notably to get the 33* achievement before TI.

Totally agree @Hotsauce
No idea what the post starter put this up for, but your utilities are AMAZING, and have helped so many players out, so thanks for that!

"Adzski;c-2121797" wrote:
Totally agree @Hotsauce
No idea what the post starter put this up for, but your utilities are AMAZING, and have helped so many players out, so thanks for that!

OP probably just salty over the Ahnald thing for some reason and trying to throw shade everywhere.

Rules should apply to everyone.

"YOUniverse;c-2121805" wrote:
Rules should apply to everyone.

So, you're mad that most of the whales in the game are allowed to play? What do you think would happen if they actually banned everyone that fell under the account sharing?

Also, the rules *do* apply to everyone, it's just that everyone else is smart enough not to DM the head of cheating enforcement about a problem with an account they shouldn't be using.

"StarSon;c-2121819" wrote:

"YOUniverse;c-2121805" wrote:
Rules should apply to everyone.

So, you're mad that most of the whales in the game are allowed to play? What do you think would happen if they actually banned everyone that fell under the account sharing?

Also, the rules *do* apply to everyone, it's just that everyone else is smart enough not to DM the head of cheating enforcement about a problem with an account they shouldn't be using.

1) We all know it would be a nightmare. If CG were to do that, they would lose out. However, if they were to do that it would tell us that rules are rules and they should be followed.
2) Do they? Negotiating with cheaters who spent money, yet perm-banning someone for a minor offence is applying rules to everybody, yes. But, there is not point in rules if punishments for disregarding those rules are not equal, or handed out fairly. Say you were doing a really important test for school etc. One guy cheats on and during the test, and is only given a minor deduction to their marks. You bought someone to help you study for this test so you could pass. The teacher finds out and you get an instant 0. What would be your reaction.
It’s not the best of analogies but I think it gets the point across.

"Ggdjqjchsabjdj;c-2121829" wrote:

"StarSon;c-2121819" wrote:

"YOUniverse;c-2121805" wrote:
Rules should apply to everyone.

So, you're mad that most of the whales in the game are allowed to play? What do you think would happen if they actually banned everyone that fell under the account sharing?

Also, the rules *do* apply to everyone, it's just that everyone else is smart enough not to DM the head of cheating enforcement about a problem with an account they shouldn't be using.

1) We all know it would be a nightmare. If CG were to do that, they would lose out. However, if they were to do that it would tell us that rules are rules and they should be followed.
2) Do they? Negotiating with cheaters who spent money, yet perm-banning someone for a minor offence is applying rules to everybody, yes. But, there is not point in rules if punishments for disregarding those rules are not equal, or handed out fairly. Say you were doing a really important test for school etc. One guy cheats on and during the test, and is only given a minor deduction to their marks. You bought someone to help you study for this test so you could pass. The teacher finds out and you get an instant 0. What would be your reaction.
It’s not the best of analogies but I think it gets the point across.

I agree, if you cheat, it should be a perma-ban regardless. But it never has been, so that's not new. They have also always shown deference to the whales, so that's not new either.

When you really boil it down, they are CG's rules, they can enforce them or not at their discretion, and dole out punishments as they see fit, whether you like it or not.

@StarSon So rules are BEST enforced by cherry picking who receives the consequences?

"Ironjehoshaphat;c-2121848" wrote:
@StarSon So rules are BEST enforced by cherry picking who receives the consequences?

I never said that.

"StarSon;c-2121819" wrote:

"YOUniverse;c-2121805" wrote:
Rules should apply to everyone.

So, you're mad that most of the whales in the game are allowed to play? What do you think would happen if they actually banned everyone that fell under the account sharing?

Also, the rules *do* apply to everyone, it's just that everyone else is smart enough not to DM the head of cheating enforcement about a problem with an account they shouldn't be using.

Look rules especially rules on cheating are not really enforced especially if you pay CG a lot of money.

On the other hand if you get your hands on a kraken account and make youtube videos to promote the game that is a permanent ban offense and no negotiations will occur. One time and your done forever.

So we learned it's better to cheat and pay than to be critical of CG. Well some learned that I already knew it. People have been cheating for the longest time some guildmates cheated openly and were not even banned but they spent a lot of money so that provally influenced the decisions CG made.

If I was a non cheater whale who spent thousands and thousands to compete and found out others who we also spent got to cheat and pick their suspension time when caught I would be irate!!!

Luckily I've done my share of things over the years to help me progress like a p2w account while still being f2p.